What about IP address resolution? What about accessing internal resources when there is a valid public DNS record for that resource?

I know that in an ideal world we would all be using DNS rather than IP addresses, and that internal and external hostnames would be different; we don't live in an ideal world and large businesses frequently encounter both of these issues.

This somehow reminds me of when Wal-Mart had meat cutters threatening to form a union. They then got rid of the meat cutter position and had machines do it at the factory. I guess Apple will be taking the same approach to avoid future payments. This world really is just messed up...

This somehow reminds me of when Wal-Mart had meat cutters threatening to form a union. They then got rid of the meat cutter position and had machines do it at the factory. I guess Apple will be taking the same approach to avoid future payments. This world really is just messed up...

You get the prestigious award for random irrelevant comparison coming out of left field sir.

This somehow reminds me of when Wal-Mart had meat cutters threatening to form a union. They then got rid of the meat cutter position and had machines do it at the factory. I guess Apple will be taking the same approach to avoid future payments. This world really is just messed up...

Yes, it's exactly the same... except that VirnetX is a troll corporation that doesn't actually do any work, and merely sues other companies for supposed patent infringement. As seen here, if they bring enough suits, eventually one of them pays well enough to support the whole venture.Yes, this world really is messed up, for the opposite reason that you think.

This somehow reminds me of when Wal-Mart had meat cutters threatening to form a union. They then got rid of the meat cutter position and had machines do it at the factory. I guess Apple will be taking the same approach to avoid future payments. This world really is just messed up...

Clearly the next step is for Apple to fire their meat cutters and replace them with machines.

I would love to hear Adam Orth's critique of this decision. Actually, I wonder if the sort of secure phone home connection the Xbox will be doing will also run afoul of/is licensed by VirnetX. But the idea is sooooo ridiculous and in my reading back when, not even a tricky thing to conjure up.

This somehow reminds me of when Wal-Mart had meat cutters threatening to form a union. They then got rid of the meat cutter position and had machines do it at the factory. I guess Apple will be taking the same approach to avoid future payments. This world really is just messed up...

Yes, it's exactly the same... except that VirnetX is a troll corporation that doesn't actually do any work, and merely sues other companies for supposed patent infringement. As seen here, if they bring enough suits, eventually one of them pays well enough to support the whole venture.Yes, this world really is messed up, for the opposite reason that you think.

On the other hand, Apple is an angel corporation who sues other companies for supposed patent infringement.

I don't think there's much to be opinionated about there, the invalidated patent means others can implement it , and apple can't sue anyone for it , and there are some appeals coming from previous cases where apple did sue based on this patent.

This somehow reminds me of when Wal-Mart had meat cutters threatening to form a union. They then got rid of the meat cutter position and had machines do it at the factory. I guess Apple will be taking the same approach to avoid future payments. This world really is just messed up...

Clearly the next step is for Apple to fire their meat cutters and replace them with machines.

No, no, it's the other way around. We need to replace the machines with miniature people who can't be patented (or are patented first).

I would love to hear Adam Orth's critique of this decision. Actually, I wonder if the sort of secure phone home connection the Xbox will be doing will also run afoul of/is licensed by VirnetX. But the idea is sooooo ridiculous and in my reading back when, not even a tricky thing to conjure up.

That aside - it's complete BS and the Judge should be ousted for making the decision he did - not to mention the brainchildren at the USPTO for vaildating the patent to begin with. Someone filing a batch of patents in 2002± for VPN / DNS connectivity should have been tossed out to start with sicne those protocols have been around for 25+ years prior to that. Just because they were combined and used in some fashion - does not make it patentable.

if VirnetX wins just one percent of royalties on the sale of iOS devices, it could make a ton of money. In fact, one percent isn't outside the realm of possibility

I don't think that is correct.

VirnetX might be able to get 1% of the royalty from VPN features in iOS devices. They wouldn't get 1% of all iOS devices.

You would have to find out how many iOS users actually ever set their VPN to turn on automatically (I use VPN regularly but I don't use that feature, so I wouldn't be included). The percentage would be coming out of those iOS device sales only, and I'm pretty sure less than one in 50,000 iOS users are using this patented technology.

I hate the iOS implementation of VPN. Every time I unlock my phone, I have to manually reestablish the VPN connection. There should be a setting to make it reconnect automatically. Doesn't look like this lawsuit will help fix that.

This somehow reminds me of when Wal-Mart had meat cutters threatening to form a union. They then got rid of the meat cutter position and had machines do it at the factory. I guess Apple will be taking the same approach to avoid future payments. This world really is just messed up...

You get the prestigious award for random irrelevant comparison coming out of left field sir.

I took this comment to mean that WalMart decided to completely avoid having to worry about their issue by simply getting rid of the problem. Then the fear is that in the future, Apple too could decide it isn't worth litigation over a patent and simply drops features from their phones. Someone suing me about VPNs? "Ah hell with it", easier to just get rid of that functionality for the few percent of users.

I happen to agree, if not so for Apple, for all the many companies that are at risk of these ridiculous patent claims. It's much easier to give in and give up for a startup.

I would love to hear Adam Orth's critique of this decision. Actually, I wonder if the sort of secure phone home connection the Xbox will be doing will also run afoul of/is licensed by VirnetX. But the idea is sooooo ridiculous and in my reading back when, not even a tricky thing to conjure up.

That aside - it's complete BS and the Judge should be ousted for making the decision he did - not to mention the brainchildren at the USPTO for vaildating the patent to begin with. Someone filing a batch of patents in 2002± for VPN / DNS connectivity should have been tossed out to start with sicne those protocols have been around for 25+ years prior to that. Just because they were combined and used in some fashion - does not make it patentable.

Yeah, I have to wonder what in this patent could be with hundreds of millions of dollars, but could be corrected by a software update that apparently has minimal impact on visible behavior. That is really a boat load of money. Exactly what does this patent allegedly do, anyway?

Moderation: flagged for trolling.

Virnetx has valid inventions and software products. The inventors of auto/secure DNS/VPN came from SAIC work for Virnetx- this is not trolling. Virnetx has a product in beta (Gabriel) which it will be licensing. They are not a troll. Apple is a troll if you use that definition They do not heisitate to sue others using their patents but cry like iBoys when they get caught violating--as is SO obvious in this case.Do your homework instead of spreading others' mis-info.

Virnetx has valid inventions and software products. The inventors of auto/secure DNS/VPN came from SAIC work for Virnetx- this is not trolling. Virnetx has a product in beta (Gabriel) which it will be licensing. They are not a troll. Apple is a troll if you use that definition They do not heisitate to sue others using their patents but cry like iBoys when they get caught violating--as is SO obvious in this case.Do your homework instead of spreading others' mis-info.

Apparently, you do not understand how "Trolls" or NPE's (Non-Practicing Entities) work.

They buy up groups of patents, sometimes hiring the original patent holders to function as "expert witnesses", and then send massive numbers of cease and desist letters and/or file preemptive lawsuits with the aim to get enough companies to settle to make the process pay, and it usually does.

They make nothing. They invent nothing. They target, primarily rich targets that would provide a big payday and (increasingly) start-up companies without the resources to take them to court (which typically costs $2.5m plus if the case goes to trial).